Piot Maarten, Mestdagh Merijn, Riese Harriëtte, Weermeijer Jeroen, Brouwer Jannie M A, Kuppens Peter, Dejonckheere Egon, Bos Fionneke M
Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Psychiatry, Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion regulation (ICPE), Groningen, the Netherlands.
Internet Interv. 2022 Sep 26;30:100575. doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2022.100575. eCollection 2022 Dec.
Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a scientific self-monitoring method to capture individuals' daily life experiences. Early on, EMA has been suggested to have the potential to improve mental health care. However, it remains unclear if and how EMA should be implemented. This requires an in-depth investigation of how practitioners and researchers view the implementation of EMA.
Explore the perspectives of mental health practitioners and EMA researchers on the utility of EMA for mental health care.
Practitioners ( = 89; psychiatrists, psychologists, psychiatric nurses) and EMA researchers ( = 62) completed a survey about EMA in clinical practice. This survey addressed EMA goals for practitioner and patient, requirements regarding clinical use of EMA, and (dis)advantages of EMA compared to treatment-as-usual. -Tests were used to determine agreement with each statement and whether practitioners' and researchers' views differed significantly. Linear regression was used to explore predictors of goals and preferences (e.g., EMA experience).
Practitioners and researchers considered EMA to be a useful clinical tool for diverse stages of care. They indicated EMA to be most useful for gaining insight into the context specificity of symptoms (55.0 %), whereas receiving alerts when symptoms increase was rated the least useful (11.3 %, alerts is in 95 % of bootstrap iterations between rank 8 and 10). Compared to treatment-as-usual, EMA was considered easier to use ( = 4.87, = 5.30, < .001) and interpret (M = 4.52, = 3.61, < .001), but also more burdensome for the patient (M = 4.48, = 3.17, < .001). Although participants preferred personalization of the EMA diary, they also suggested that EMA should cost practitioners and patients limited time. The preference for creating personalized EMA was related to the level of experience with EMA. Finally, they highlighted the need for practitioner training and patient full-time access to the EMA feedback.
This survey study demonstrated that practitioners and researchers expect EMA to have added value for mental health care. Concrete recommendations for implementation of EMA are formulated. This may inform the development of specific clinical applications and user-friendly EMA software.
生态瞬时评估（EMA）是一种用于捕捉个体日常生活经历的科学自我监测方法。早期，有人提出EMA有改善精神卫生保健的潜力。然而，EMA是否以及应如何实施仍不明确。这需要深入调查从业者和研究人员如何看待EMA的实施。
探讨精神卫生从业者和EMA研究人员对EMA在精神卫生保健中的效用的看法。
从业者（n = 89；精神科医生、心理学家、精神科护士）和EMA研究人员（n = 62）完成了一项关于EMA在临床实践中的调查。该调查涉及从业者和患者的EMA目标、EMA临床使用的要求以及与常规治疗相比EMA的（不）优点。采用t检验确定对每条陈述的认同度以及从业者和研究人员的观点是否存在显著差异。使用线性回归探索目标和偏好的预测因素（例如，EMA经验）。
从业者和研究人员认为EMA是护理不同阶段有用的临床工具。他们指出EMA对洞察症状的情境特异性最有用（55.0%），而症状增加时接收警报被评为最无用（11.3%，在95%的自抽样迭代中，警报在第8至10位之间）。与常规治疗相比，EMA被认为更易于使用（M = 4.87，M = 5.30，p <.001）和解释（M = 4.52，M = 3.61，p <.001），但对患者来说负担也更重（M = 4.48，M = 3.17，p <.001）。尽管参与者倾向于EMA日记的个性化，但他们也建议EMA应使从业者和患者花费的时间有限。创建个性化EMA的偏好与EMA经验水平有关。最后，他们强调了从业者培训以及患者能够随时获取EMA反馈的必要性。
这项调查研究表明，从业者和研究人员期望EMA能为精神卫生保健增添价值。制定了EMA实施的具体建议。这可能为特定临床应用和用户友好的EMA软件的开发提供参考。
